Started By
Message

re: ALERT: Gluten is wearing away your intestines and giving you acne!

Posted on 3/24/15 at 3:36 pm to
Posted by maqueschoux
Lake Charles
Member since Aug 2011
140 posts
Posted on 3/24/15 at 3:36 pm to


This is a quote from an article you linked...

"It has been estimated that only 1 kilogram (2.2 lbs) would be enough to kill the entire human population. At that point, your body also has to contend with the toxins produced by the pathogens. Once the chronic inflammation sets in, you’re well on your way toward chronic and potentially debilitating disease."

I find it funny that you koolaid drinkers get so vocal about Monsanto. You read these articles with all of these claims of "chronic debilitating disease" caused by glyphosate (not referring to it as Roundup shows your lack of knowledge on the subject). Some lady in some yuppie town that doesn't shave her armpits and is forced to write propoganda articles because people in her own industry have shunned her bogus ideas tells you something and you eat up every word she says.

Quit being such pussies.

I was doused with roundup, 2-4-d, ordram, stam, aim, fertilizer, and plenty other chemicals in my younger years as crop-dusters didn't have GPS systems and we had to flag them on each end of the field. I am perfectly healthy...

Pussies
Posted by TRUERockyTop
Appalachia
Member since Sep 2011
16866 posts
Posted on 3/24/15 at 4:22 pm to
Spoken like one of the first tobacco users who was stupid enough to believe that their wouldn't be any long term health defects caused by using Marlboro's, etc products.

Spoken like the group of doctors who ostracized their fellow colleagues for wanting to wash their hands in between surgeries/patients in the 19th century to prevent the spread of disease.

Spoken like.. well, you get where this is going.

From the institute of science in society. For your viewing pleasure.

quote:

Evidence of harm to health. Monsanto and the European Commission (EC) have known about birth defects since the 1980s. Industry studies found statistically significant skeletal and/or visceral abnormalities as well as reduced viability and increase in spontaneous abortions in rats and rabbits exposed to high doses of glyphosate. Lower doses were later shown to cause dilated hearts.  The EC dismissed all the findings.Independent studies have since found caudal vertebrae loss in rats treated with sub-lethal doses of the herbicide; as well as craniofacial abnormalities, increased embryonic mortality and endocrine disruption, abnormal onset of puberty, and abnormal sexual behaviour and sperm count in male offspring of mothers exposed during gestation.GM soybean-fed female rats gave birth to excessive numbers of severely stunted pups, with over half of the litter dead by three weeks, and the surviving pups were sterile.Non-mammalian animals exposed to glyphosate resulted in increased gonad size, increased mortality, craniofacial abnormalities correlating with abnormal retinoic acid signalling, and reduced egg viability.In vitro exposure to glyphosate resulted in endocrine disruption and death of cells of the testis, placenta, and umbilical cord.A long term in vivo study on rats found females exposed to Roundup and/or Roundup Ready GM maize were two to three times as likely to die as controls and much more likely to develop large mammary tumours, while males presented large tumours four times controls and up to 600 days earlier.Clinical data from Argentina are consistent with lab findings of increases in birth defects and cancers in regions with large areas cultivating glyphosate-tolerant soybean.Endocrine disruption has been observed in both in vivo and in vitro studies in the laboratory, including abnormal levels of testosterone, aromatase enzyme, testosterone and oestrogen receptors, leutinising hormone, follicle-stimulating hormone. Endocrine disruption can lead to cancers and reproductive problems.Epidemiological studies have found links to cancer including non-Hodgkin lymphoma and increased plasma cell proliferation. Cancer rates have risen in in glyphosate-use zones in Argentina. Lab studies found significant increases in interstitial cell tumour incidence in rats as well as skin tumour-promoting activity. Numerous lab studies including those performed by industry showed glyphosate damages DNA of cells in culture as well as in humans living in glyphosate-sprayed regions of Argentina. Non-mammalian studies found defects in cell cycle checkpoints and DNA damage repair machinery. DNA damage is a major prelude to cancers. AMPA, the glyphosate metabolite, also has genotoxic effects.Neurotoxicity effects include Parkinsonism have emerged following acute exposure. Exposure to glyphosate resulted in oxidative stress in lab animals and death of neuronal cells, correlating with Parkinsonian pathology. Acute exposure in fish resulted in acetylcholine esterase (AChE) inhibition. An epidemiological study linked glyphosate -exposure to Attention-Deficit-Hyperactive disorder in children, a disorder associated with AChE inhibition. The original neurotoxicity studies carried out by industry were ruled invalid by the US Environment Protection Agency and urgently need re-examining by independent scientists.Internal organ toxicity has been documented in animal feeding studies with glyphosate-tolerant soybean. Rats suffered kidney abnormalities including renal leakage and ionic disturbances, and liver pathology including irregular hepatocyte nuclei, and increased metabolic rates.Acute toxicity of glyphosate is officially declared low by government agencies; however agricultural workers have reported many symptoms including skin irritation, skin lesions, eye irritation, allergies, respiratory problems and vomiting. Ingestion of large volumes causes systemic toxicity and death.Evidence of negative environmental and agronomic impactsWidespread use of glyphosate has led to the evolution of glyphosate-resistant weeds covering an estimated 120 million hectares globally in 2010. So far, 23 species of weeds have been recorded, forcing Monsanto to acknowledge the problem and protect their profits by declaring that their warranty does not cover yield losses. Glyphosate-resistant weeds are threatening the utility of glyphosate and glyphosate-tolerant crops. Resistant weeds are likely responsible for increased herbicide use. Argentinian use went from 2 to 20 litres per hectare between 1996 and 2010.Glyphosate-tolerant crops, as well as other crops grown subsequently in the same fields are affected by glyphosate’s metal chelating properties. Chelation and immobilisation of metal micronutrients such as manganese damages physiological processes in the plant including disease resistance and photosynthesis. Numerous diseases including Goss’ wilt, Fusarium wilt, and Take All are now widespread in the US. More than 40 diseases have been linked to glyphosate use. Reduced lignin content in glyphosate-tolerant crops leads to reduced water retention, requiring more water, and severely compromising yields during drought years.Soil biology is strongly disrupted by glyphosate, which is toxic to many beneficial micro- and macro-organisms including earthworms. It harms a wide range of  microbes, those producing indole-acetic acid (a growth-promoting auxin), responsible for mycorrhizae associations, phosphorus & zinc uptake; microbes such as Pseudomonads and Bacillus that convert insoluble soil oxides to plant-available forms of manganese and iron; nitrogen-fixing bacteria Bradyrhizobium, Rhizobium; and other organisms involved in the biological control of soil-borne diseases.Glyphosate may be retained and transported in soils, with long-lasting cumulative effects on soil ecology and fertility, especially in northern ecosystems with long biologically inactive winters.Glyphosate’s high water solubility makes aquatic wild-life very vulnerable. Lab studies showed extreme toxicity, killing many frog species. Roundup decreased the survival of algae and increased toxic bloom-forming cyanobacteria, hence accelerating the deterioration of water quality especially in small water systems.Indirect effects through habitat disruption are also a concern, as highlighted by the major decline of Monarch butterfly populations whose larvae feed on milkweed that are largely destroyed by glyphosate applications in the US.Livestock illnesses are linked to GM diets, and include reproductive problems, diarrhoea, bloating, spontaneous abortions, reduced live births, inflamed digestive systems, and nutrient deficiency. This has translated into much reduced profit for farmers.Contamination of ground water supplies as well as rain and air has been documented in Spain and the US, threatening our drinking water, leaving people vulnerable to exposure. Berlin city residents were recently shown to carry glyphosate levels above permitted EU drinking water levels.

Conclusion: The serious harm to health and the environment caused by the use of glyphosate herbicides is clear. There is a compelling case for banning or phasing out glyphosate-based herbicides worldwide, in favor of a global transition to non-GM, herbicide-free organic agriculture.
This post was edited on 3/24/15 at 4:30 pm
Posted by TRUERockyTop
Appalachia
Member since Sep 2011
16866 posts
Posted on 3/24/15 at 4:23 pm to
quote:

A feeding trial lasting two years on rats showed that females exposed to Monsanto’s glyphosate formulation Round-up and/or Roundup-tolerant genetically modified (GM) maize were 2 to 3 times as likely to die as controls and much more likely to develop large mammary tumours. In males, liver congestions and necrosis were 2.5 to 5.5 times as frequent as the controls, while kidney diseases were 1.3-2.3 times controls. Males also presented large kidney or skin tumours four times as often as the controls and up to 600 days earlier. Biochemical data confirmed significant kidney chronic deficiencies for all treatments and both sexes.

The research team, led by Giles-Eric Séralini of Caen University in France, suggested that the results can be explained by “non-linear endocrine-disrupting effects of Roundup” and “the overexpression of the transgene in the GMO and its metabolic consequences.”


Posted by 5thTiger
Member since Nov 2014
7996 posts
Posted on 3/24/15 at 4:52 pm to
"Accept GMOs, or Millions Will Starve" -Bill Gates
Posted by TRUERockyTop
Appalachia
Member since Sep 2011
16866 posts
Posted on 3/24/15 at 5:16 pm to
I don't know in which context you are using that quote. Please expand
This post was edited on 3/24/15 at 5:17 pm
Posted by deeprig9
Unincorporated Ozora
Member since Sep 2012
74923 posts
Posted on 3/24/15 at 5:25 pm to
Mind linking the source of that wall of text?


Posted by TRUERockyTop
Appalachia
Member since Sep 2011
16866 posts
Posted on 3/24/15 at 5:56 pm to
LINK

That specifically is from 2012. There's a lot more current articles available.
This post was edited on 3/24/15 at 6:01 pm
Posted by deeprig9
Unincorporated Ozora
Member since Sep 2012
74923 posts
Posted on 3/24/15 at 6:51 pm to
Do you realize that site is not actually a scientific organization?

They have hundreds and hundreds of "scientific" papers you can buy for four Euros. All of them alarmist quackery.


All of them written by the same two quacks.

Ho and Saunders.


100% bullshite.
Posted by TRUERockyTop
Appalachia
Member since Sep 2011
16866 posts
Posted on 3/24/15 at 7:10 pm to
Watch me

I could throw hundreds of articles at you from scores of scientists from Europe to the U.S with scientific data backing up their research. Some of which has been going on for 15+ years, exclusively.

At the end of the day, I don't care enough or have the time to do either. Do yourself a favor and watch the video.

What you do with the information provided is on you.

This post was edited on 3/24/15 at 7:11 pm
Posted by deeprig9
Unincorporated Ozora
Member since Sep 2012
74923 posts
Posted on 3/24/15 at 7:12 pm to
quote:

I could throw hundreds of articles at you from scores of scientists from Europe to the U.S with scientific data backing up their research. Some of which has been going on for 15+ years, exclusively.

At the end of the day, I don't care enough or have the time to do either. Do yourself a favor and watch the video.

What you do with the information provided is on you.


Nah. My wife is an agriculture scientist and also a health nut. If she doesn't have a problem with Monsanto or glyphosate salt, then you shouldn't either.

Posted by Roger Klarvin
DFW
Member since Nov 2012
46671 posts
Posted on 3/24/15 at 7:13 pm to
quote:

Gluten isn't the problem, it's the delivery method most of the time.

It's the high amounts of processed food and poorly made breads ect that are the problem.


Correct

This version of ST is growing on me
Posted by TMDawg
Member since Nov 2012
5383 posts
Posted on 3/24/15 at 7:20 pm to
quote:

Keep in mind that this chemical, glyphosate, destroys living organisms by binding itself to the metal in all living organisms protein cells. Effectively destroying or making the protein unusable. What happens when your protein becomes unusable or destroyed? Your body starts showing sypmtoms of disease and decay. Organs begin to fail.. you see where I'm going with this.
It blocks EPSP synthase. It does bind metals which is why it worked in descaling, but that's not why it's so valuable as an herbicide. It's because people don't make tryptophan so we don't use that pathway but plants do so they can be selectively targeted.

quote:

protein cells
da fuk?

quote:

what happens when your protein becomes unusable or destroyed? Your body starts to show symptoms of disease and decay
What protein are you referring to?

quote:

Cancer(s), autism, dementia, alzheimers, etc. etc. are all directly linked to it.
Directly? Interesting use of the word.
This post was edited on 3/24/15 at 7:28 pm
Posted by TRUERockyTop
Appalachia
Member since Sep 2011
16866 posts
Posted on 3/24/15 at 7:29 pm to
quote:

Nah. My wife is an agriculture scientist and also a health nut. If she doesn't have a problem with Monsanto or glyphosate salt, then you shouldn't either.






quote:

An international committee of cancer experts shocked the agribusiness world a few days ago when it announced that two widely used pesticides are "probably carcinogenic to humans." The well-respected International Agency for Research on Cancer published a brief explanation of its conclusions in The Lancet and plans to issue a book-length version later this year.


quote:

In fact, the IARC's assessment leaves many questions unanswered, including how much risk glyphosate poses.

"What the IARC performs is hazard assessment," says Aaron Blair, who chaired the group of scientists that prepared the IARC's assessment of glyphosate. Blair is a scientist emeritus at the National Cancer Institute. Hazard assessment, he explains, is concerned with a simple question: Could a substance cause damage "in some circumstance, at some level of exposure?" How commonly such circumstances or exposures actually occur in the real world, he says, is an entirely different question, and not one that IARC tries to answer.

In other words, the IARC is saying that glyphosate probably could cause cancer in humans, but not that it probably does.

Blair says that two types of evidence convinced the committee that the glyphosate has the potential to cause cancer. First, there were laboratory studies showing that the chemical can damage DNA and chromosomes in human cells. This type of damage can lead to the emergence of cancer. Second, Blair says, some studies showed increased rates of cancerous tumors in mice and rats that were exposed to glyphosate. These were rare forms of cancer that are unlikely to occur by themselves, adding to the evidence that glyphosate caused them.



LINK

Published today. I'm not sure if you've heard me say this before, but I could throw hundreds of articles at you from scores of scientists from Europe to the U.S with scientific data backing up their research. Some of which has been going on for 15+ years, exclusively.

At the end of the day, I don't care enough or have the time to do either.
Posted by TRUERockyTop
Appalachia
Member since Sep 2011
16866 posts
Posted on 3/24/15 at 7:36 pm to
I paraphrased, and it's fair to say, paraphrased poorly in some of what your quoting.

You can watch what was being paraphrased from the source, Dr. Thierry Vrain, soil biologist and former Department head of molecular biology/bio-technology at Canada's summerland research station. He has been running his own research program to engineer nematode resistance genes in crops.

That video can be viewed, Here or Here
This post was edited on 3/24/15 at 7:44 pm
Posted by deeprig9
Unincorporated Ozora
Member since Sep 2012
74923 posts
Posted on 3/24/15 at 7:43 pm to
Jesus, you literally don't even read your own cut/paste jobs.

Posted by TRUERockyTop
Appalachia
Member since Sep 2011
16866 posts
Posted on 3/24/15 at 7:50 pm to
Because some scientists are saying round up "is probably carcinogenic to humans" and others are flat out saying that it is carcinogenic?

This post was edited on 3/24/15 at 7:51 pm
Posted by deeprig9
Unincorporated Ozora
Member since Sep 2012
74923 posts
Posted on 3/24/15 at 7:53 pm to
Take off the space blanket.
Posted by TMDawg
Member since Nov 2012
5383 posts
Posted on 3/24/15 at 7:53 pm to
My problem is more with decisions like banning stuff being made without a solid scientific basis. I mean sure, in high amounts most chemicals can hurt you. People take aspirin, ibuprofen, etc all the time but there are people that have bled to death or are on dialysis because of them. But that doesn't mean we have to ban them.

I will say that of all the food crazes people get on (gluten may be the worst - unless you have Celiac, the gluten free stuff is just stupid), not wanting chemicals is one that at least makes sense.

I think the trendiness of a lot of the food stuff is what gets annoying too. Especially when the person talking about it clearly doesn't know what they're talking about.
This post was edited on 3/24/15 at 7:56 pm
Posted by deeprig9
Unincorporated Ozora
Member since Sep 2012
74923 posts
Posted on 3/24/15 at 7:55 pm to
You know what's proven to cause cancer in humans?




The god damn sun.
Posted by TMDawg
Member since Nov 2012
5383 posts
Posted on 3/24/15 at 7:56 pm to
quote:

Because some scientists are saying round up "is probably carcinogenic to humans" and others are flat out saying that it is carcinogenic?


From your article:

quote:

How commonly such circumstances or exposures actually occur in the real world, he says, is an entirely different question, and not one that IARC tries to answer.

In other words, the IARC is saying that glyphosate probably could cause cancer in humans, but not that it probably does.
first pageprev pagePage 3 of 4Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow SECRant for SEC Football News
Follow us on X and Facebook to get the latest updates on SEC Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitter